[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54BFF8B3.6060802@roeck-us.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:06:27 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
CC: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>,
Paul Moore <pmoore@...hat.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-audit@...hat.com,
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jan 20 -- Kernel panic - Unable to mount
root fs
On 01/21/2015 10:29 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 05:32:13AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> Another data point (though I have no idea if it is useful or what it means):
>>
>> In the working case, path_init sets nd->flags to 0x50 or 0x51.
>> In the non-working case (ie for all files with a '/' in the name),
>> it sets nd->flags to 0x10 or 0x11, even though it is always called
>> with the LOOKUP_RCU bit set in flags.
>
> Umm... Are those path_init() succeeding or failing? Note that path_init()
> includes "walk everything except for the last component", so your non-working
> case is "have it walk anything at all". What's failing there? path_init()
> or handling the remaining component?
>
path_init() returns -2. Guess that explains the unexpected flags ;-).
The failuere is from
link_path_walk()
walk_component()
Guenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists